Congressional Input To Program Evaluation

With increasing frequency the U. S. Congress is including mandates for evaluation in legislation that creates or reauthorizes social programs. Recent examinations of the federal role in evaluation have claimed that congressional calls for evaluation are overly vague and that improved evaluation would result from greater specification of informa tion needs by Congress. This article considers the advantages and disadvantages of increasing the specificity of legislation calling for evaluation by reviewing the congres sional mandates for several national-level evaluations and examining in-depth the design of one congressionally mandated evaluation that included very specific design parameters in the authorizing legislation. The conclusion is that congressional input in the areas of evaluation questions, audiences, and timeliness is warranted and important, while explic itness in areas of research design is unnecessarily restrictive and can diminish the quality of evaluations. Congressional review of evaluation plans prepared by federal agencies and their contractors is recommended in cases where Congress is concerned about meth odology.